E-bikes will not exist in 10 years time

[Tiberius]

Predictions are always difficult, especially about the future.

At the moment it is all controlled, or distorted, depending on your point of view, by the legislation. Currently we have a market for below 15 mph devices, which work well as electric assist bikes. These are never going to be and are not intended to be, replacements for cars or motor bikes, so its a limited market, at least in today's world.

Abover 15 mph, electric bikes have to compete head on with motor cycles and motor scooters, and the public will always choose the petrol motors, at least in today's world.

What could change it is two things. One is if the legislation made a new category for 30 mph, zero emission, personal transport machines. Then electric bikes or electric scooters would overnight be the things everybody wanted.

The other thing is Russ's point - what happens when energy is treated as a scarce or valuable resource? Then everything changes. Its no good then debating whether e-bikes can compete with cars, because the whole concept of a car no longer makes sense. The whole idea of travelling large distances to work disappears. In fact, even the concept of a road starts coming under scrutiny. Its all very well imagining the future, but the lesson of history is that change does not come from the direction you are looking in.

Nick

 

[davidw]

I start from the premise that you're never going to get people out of the cars. They are too inbuilt - rightly or wrongly. But cars will change. Already Mercedes have an electric version of their Smart car. It is undergoing trials in London and other cities in the world. It has a (governed) maximum of 60 mph, it has a range of 70 miles - enough to get even me to my nearest Sainsbury's and back, just! - it does not pollute either by sound or emissions. It is not subject to either Road Tax or congestion charges - although I can't see that state of affairs lasting long when everybody has got one - and, unlike the Hydrogen fuel touted in today's headlines it requires no addition or change to the existing infrastructure. You would just plug it in alongside your e bike each night. Now there's a future!

 

[HarryB]

I start from the premise that you're never going to get people out of the cars. They are too inbuilt - rightly or wrongly. But cars will change. Already Mercedes have an electric version of their Smart car. It is undergoing trials in London and other cities in the world. It has a (governed) maximum of 60 mph, it has a range of 70 miles - enough to get even me to my nearest Sainsbury's and back, just! - it does not pollute either by sound or emissions. It is not subject to either Road Tax or congestion charges - although I can't see that state of affairs lasting long when everybody has got one - and, unlike the Hydrogen fuel touted in today's headlines it requires no addition or change to the existing infrastructure. You would just plug it in alongside your e bike each night. Now there's a future!

How will the average person charge their electric smart car though? There has to be a charging infrastructure otherwise we are all going to be tripping up on those cables

 

[sabretache]

By far the biggest influence on the question posed by this thread will, IMHO, be the one first raised by Russ - availability of cheap hydrocarbon based energy. All talk of cheap non-polluting alternatives to oil, beg massive unanswered (some would say 'unanswerable') questions. For example, hydrogen is not a primary energy source, it is simply a carrier - much like a battery - and damned expensive (inefficient in primary energy consumption terms) to produce - let alone to distribute in petrol station type fashion and which will require an entirely new infrastructure too. Likewise electricity itself; electric vehicles may not themselves pollute but the present balance of plant types required to generate the stuff certainly do. There is now a wide consensus that the global peak of all-fluids hydrocarbon energy production is less than about 10 years away, if it is not passed already. With over 85% of global transport still dependant on oil and burgeoning demand from aspiring Indias and Chinas, that has massive implications for our happy motoring/cheap-flight holidays lifestyle (It throws considerable and much needed light on the real reason for our insistence on invading other countries too, perish the thought)

This is big subject - VERY BIG - in both importance and complexity - and yet near total silence from the politicians.

My own opinion? - I think the pressure to use ALL energy more efficiently will mount inexorably - and principally through the pricing mechanism. So, I think the electric bike and its successors/derivatives etc have a seriously bright future; society in general and its cosy personal transportation assumptions less so.

 

[simonbarnett]

I can't see 10 years into the future and the views here are interesting. The key at the moment is the lack of regulation and cost beyond the initial price and replacement batteries. As for others, motorbikes would be the nearest competitor but there's a big tax and insurance cost and no fitness reward.

 

[johnl]

Pedelecs will catch on, but their popularity and numbers will probably be like that of recumbent bicycles. Or is that just another way of saying that they will never be real popular?

Solutions to global warming all seem to revolve around technologies for production of electricity, either by way of nuclear power or by burning fossil fuel and sequestering the carbon dioxide. A bicycle gives one a little more independence than does a street car or electric powered bus. A bicycle is much more energy efficient than a car. We'll never have nuclear reactors on bicycles, nor will we ever directly burn fossil fuel and sequester the CO2 directly on a car, motorcycle, or bicycle. So the electricity will be produced in big power plants and we will charge up our batteries and supercapacitors at night and ride to work in the morning.

Those of us who have always commuted to work on bikes will use pedelecs more as we age.

Of course, here in the US, very few of us commute to work on bicycles, but as gasoline gets more expensive, more people will do it.

 

[flecc]

Thanks everyone for your wide range of views, raising so many interesting points, the main ones of which which I've very briefly summarised here with the odd comment. The fact that social stigma has been raised in such different ways by Erik and halfmedley highlights the differences in cultures mentioned also by aaannndddyyy. Unlike in Denmark it seems, I see no social implications attached to mopeds in Britain, many professional people in London using them to commute.

Halfmedley's and Jeremy's agreement with my analysis is supported by Jeremy's very interesting project, highlighting just how viable e-scooters and light e-motor cycles are becoming, currently available ones previously shown in other threads by kraeuterbutter. Davidw's view that it's nigh on impossible to get people out of their cars supports my opening statement that the preference will generally be for fully motorised transport. SimonBarnett mentions motorbikes being the nearest competitors with their high tax and insrance cost, but I think the scooter/moped that I mentioned is more likely to supercede the e-bike, and the tax and insurance costs on the 30 mph restricted class are very low.

The existence of facilities like cycleroutes and charging points are raised by Erik, Django and andyh2 and that will certainly have an influence on the outcome in the short to medium term. Their views support some future for e-biking as does Footie who feels like HarryB it will only be limited at best. johnl supports that, but nonetheless indicates a difference in the USA that there will be some growth as oil supplies diminish, the States starting from a very low level of e-bike commuting. The opinion that e-biking could continue more successfully with growth possible is supported by fishingpaul, giguana and also Frank, who sees more investment in promotion making e-bike expansion possible. I don't think giguana's point regarding factories closing is realistic, since they can easily switch from e-bike to e-scooter production, some Chinese factories already having done that to supply their home market swing from e-bikes to mopeds.

TomB's view on a newer generation of light assisted e-bikes is in line with that of BikerBob in highlighting the continuing need for light hill climb assistance. Also looking to the future is prState, who raises the possibilities of energy transfer. Interestingly his two suggestions, energy transfer and energy inserted at a starting point already exist together in vehicles, since Switzerland has a bus route operated in that way. At bus stops the bus picks up electrical energy through proximity induction coils from coils embedded in the road, this then used to spin a high energy-storage flywheel up to speed. The flywheel's kinetic energy then propels the bus to the next stop for it's next energy pickup. An inadvertant reference to alternative power was made by musicbooks in his mention of hot air, though it's unlikely the Stirling engine will ever be light and compact enough for e-bikes.

Nick's point that e-bikes are not car replacements would certainly have been true in the past, but it's no longer entirely so. In London we have thousands for whom their two wheelers of all kinds are car replacements for their commuting at least, just to avoid the congestion charge and the many other restrictions and costs. Since we know these restrictions will spread elsewhere, that's likely to become more widespread. A few people have already realised they can get rid of their car completely now, so true car replacement becomes a reality for them, as it has for pioneers like the Henshaw family of A to B fame.

A far distant future has also been raised by Nick in his last paragraph, and interestingly it connects directly with my next intended subject for discussion. Like Russ, Footie and others he sees the need to detach ourselves from carbon fuel dependancy, but shows a radical future with even the possibility of the need for transport and roads disappearing in consequence. Since that's only likely to happen with a drastically reduced world population, we are in agreement yet paradoxically in total disagreement, since I think we should continue to live as we are currently doing, enjoying all our modern benefits and not worrying about the environment. Yes, we have serious environmental problems, but what we are doing will not solve them, and that's the next subject I propose for discussion. That proposes a future in which the problem of future energy provision raised by Russ and sabretache is answered. This time the discussion is in The Charging Post via this link.
.

 

[musicbooks]

Thanks everyone for your wide range of views, raising so many interesting points, the main ones of which which I've very briefly summarised here with the odd comment. The fact that social stigma has been raised in such different ways by Erik and halfmedley highlights the differences in cultures mentioned also by aaannndddyyy. Unlike in Denmark it seems, I see no social implications attached to mopeds in Britain, many professional people in London using them to commute.

Halfmedley's and Jeremy's agreement with my analysis is supported by Jeremy's very interesting project, highlighting just how viable e-scooters and light e-motor cycles are becoming, currently available ones previously shown in other threads by kraeuterbutter. Davidw's view that it's nigh on impossible to get people out of their cars supports my opening statement that the preference will generally be for fully motorised transport. SimonBarnett mentions motorbikes being the nearest competitors with their high tax and insrance cost, but I think the scooter/moped that I mentioned is more likely to supercede the e-bike, and the tax and insurance costs on the 30 mph restricted class are very low.

The existence of facilities like cycleroutes and charging points are raised by Erik, Django and andyh2 and that will certainly have an influence on the outcome in the short to medium term. Their views support some future for e-biking as does Footie who feels like HarryB it will only be limited at best. johnl supports that, but nonetheless indicates a difference in the USA that there will be some growth as oil supplies diminish, the States starting from a very low level of e-bike commuting. The opinion that e-biking could continue more successfully with growth possible is supported by fishingpaul, giguana and also Frank, who sees more investment in promotion making e-bike expansion possible. I don't think giguana's point regarding factories closing is realistic, since they can easily switch from e-bike to e-scooter production, some Chinese factories already having done that to supply their home market swing from e-bikes to mopeds.

TomB's view on a newer generation of light assisted e-bikes is in line with that of BikerBob in highlighting the continuing need for light hill climb assistance. Also looking to the future is prState, who raises the possibilities of energy transfer. Interestingly his two suggestions, energy transfer and energy inserted at a starting point already exist together in vehicles, since Switzerland has a bus route operated in that way. At bus stops the bus picks up electrical energy through proximity induction coils from coils embedded in the road, this then used to spin a high energy-storage flywheel up to speed. The flywheel's kinetic energy then propels the bus to the next stop for it's next energy pickup.

Nick's point that e-bikes are not car replacements would certainly have been true in the past, but it's no longer entirely so. In London we have thousands for whom their two wheelers of all kinds are car replacements for their commuting at least, just to avoid the congestion charge and the many other restrictions and costs. Since we know these restrictions will spread elsewhere, that's likely to become more widespread. A few people have already realised they can get rid of their car completely now, so true car replacement becomes a reality for them, as it has for pioneers like the Henshaw family of A to B fame.

A far distant future has also been raised by Nick in his last paragraph, and interestingly it connects directly with my next intended subject for discussion. Like Russ, Footie and others he sees the need to detach ourselves from carbon fuel dependancy, but shows a radical future with even the possibility of the need for transport and roads disappearing in consequence. Since that's only likely to happen with a drastically reduced world population, we are in agreement yet paradoxically in total disagreement, since I think we should continue to live as we are currently doing, enjoying all our modern benefits and not worrying about the environment. Yes, we have serious environmental problems, but what we are doing will not solve them, and that's the next subject I propose for discussion. That proposes a future in which the problem of future energy provision raised by Russ and sabretache is answered. This time the discussion is in The Charging Post via this link.
.

So you don't rate my 'hot air' prediction..? (perhaps it's already a reality)
BW
musicbooks

 

[flecc]

So you don't rate my 'hot air' prediction..? (perhaps it's already a reality)
BW
musicbooks

The one omission which was deliberate, since like John Cleese in Faulty Towers, I didn't want to mention the war.

However, since you've inadvertantly alluded to an alternative power source, for the sake of completeness I've edited you in.

Fame at last!
.

 

[musicbooks]

An inadvertant reference to alternative power was made by musicbooks in his mention of hot air, though it's unlikely the Stirling engine will ever be light and compact enough for e-bikes.

.

I could have a word with Cameron Balloons.. Their office is just down the road
BW
musicbooks

 

[Merv]

Hi, Footie. I agree with your comments... the biggest problem with any electric powered form of transport is the power source & power to weight ratio. And the eventual cost of replacing the power pack. No doubt battery technology will steadily improve as time goes on and will only be successful when power delivery and weight can be dramatically improved. You hit the nail on the head when you mention alternative power sources, i.e. Hydrogen power!! it's only a matter of time to overcome the seperating processes in such away that it can be done cheaply to produce the fuel cell. And yes_it will the guy working away in the garden shed so to speak that will do it. IT WILL COME and the power plant will be the humble electric motor, so hang onto your E_bikes folks.

 

[flecc]

But as I said when opening this thread Merv, it will also come for the electric scooter/moped. The vast majority of the British public don't like to pedal.

These tech advances don't alter that, as the bikes viability improves, so will the moped's, and the latter could become the winner as it has in the past, certainly in the UK anyway.
.

 

[Trakker]

Anyone seen this? YouTube - Hydrogen Fuel Cell electric bike

 

[MonVal Electra]

I honestly do believe that E-bikes will not only exist in 10 years time, but in fact, they will be quite prolific in number and heres my reasonings why:

The image of the electric assist bike is changing, they are no longer seen as the sole preserve of the old, infirm or disabled and as a result are attracting a new younger generation of cyclists.
This new bunch are 'keen to be seen to be green'. An E-bike allows them to flaunt their green credentials, whilst at the same time (and being the main reason for purchase) saving them an absolute fortune in travel costs (think for example London and its' congestion charging and dailing parking fees).
They can justify buying one by stating that it allows them to cycle to work without turning up hot, sticky and sweaty, unlike a conventional pedal bike -and this justification will meet with great approval from their peers, so street cred remains intact.
- Notice if you will, that a lot of newer members joining the forum are in their 30s and 40s. I believe there are even a couple of 20 somethings.

An E-bike, is the cheapest form of motorised transport and not just in terms of purchase cost but in red tape too - ie, no compulsory insurance, helmet wearing, licensing, MOT etc etc - all still needed with the purchase of a moped, electric or otherwise.

Many manufacturers, for the European market, are now making their E-bike models look more and more like conventional pedal bikes (eg- next generation Powacycles), infact with some models today, at first glance, it is hard to tell them apart (eg - Koga Miyata’s Tesla electric bikes).
With the ongoing improvements in the physical size, weight and placing of motors and battery technology eg the sparta ion- (btw, my money is on the LiFePO4 to win the battle of the Lithiums), in a couple of years, It will soon be very difficult to tell the majority of E-bikes from pedal ones and thus increased sales as they will hide the fact that the rider is being assisted.

 

[flecc]

You're right that this forum is starting to get a younger profile MonVal Electra, and that is encouraging for the near future without doubt.

I also agree about lithium iron phosphate becoming the dominant battery, but as I said, that advantage applies to the scooter/moped just as much, and they have been even more in need of good battery technology to succeed.

Although the other points about the increasingly discreet appearance and settling of design are also valid, the appeal is mainly to existing cyclists as ever, and in general the British public just don't like pedalling anything. Cyclists are very much a minority.

By the way, an aside. The Koga Miyata and Sparta Ion are essentially the same thing, motor etc, just presented differently, and both very poor hill climbers with that low powered direct drive motor. They really aren't suitable for much of the British market where our hills are.
.

 

[fishingpaul]

At the moment most electric bikes are rather uncool to the fashion concious younger generation,presently looking like a mountain bike or dutch styled bike at best, if a sleek looking reasonably cheap new model were brought onto the market,the 14+ teenagers might even become interested especially if someone seen as cool and famous were seen riding one.regarding electric scooters/mopeds i think they are useless as the pedals are splayed too far apart to pedal them and most only have one gear, i certainly would not like to ride one of these home without power,unless you meant the higher powered ones that have to be insured and a helmet must be worn to ride them,these are currently much more expensive than a conventional petrol scooter which is very cheap to run anyway (there are brand new 50cc road legal petrol scooters currently being advertised at around £650)an equivellent electric scooter would be £1200+ if the batteries lasted less than two years it would work out more expensive to run.

 

[MonVal Electra]

You're right that this forum is starting to get a younger profile MonVal Electra, and that is encouraging for the near future without doubt.

I also agree about lithium iron phosphate becoming the dominant battery, but as I said, that advantage applies to the scooter/moped just as much, and they have been even more in need of good battery technology to succeed.

Although the other points about the increasingly discreet appearance and settling of design are also valid, the appeal is mainly to existing cyclists as ever, and in general the British public just don't like pedalling anything. Cyclists are very much a minority.

By the way, an aside. The Koga Miyata and Sparta Ion are essentially the same thing, motor etc, just presented differently, and both very poor hill climbers with that low powered direct drive motor. They really aren't suitable for much of the British market where our hills are.
.

First of all, welcome back Flecc, good to see you posting regularly again .

Secondly, I totally agree with you about the Koga Miyata and Sparta Ion. They were only mentioned to demonstrate my point about how discreet some E-bike designs are today and how I expect many more to follow their lead in the not too distant future.

Where I have to disagree (repectfully) is on the point of the "the British public just don't like pedalling anything" The reason why I say this is as follows:

As you have already pointed out, cyclists in this country are very much a minority - but, they are a growing one, especially in the late 20s and the 30s to 40s age group. And as you are already aware, the majority of this growing minority started in London - and where London leads, the rest of the country tends to follow. As witnessed by the growing bicycle (including electric) sales up and down the land.

E-bikes are now generally regarded as the next, biggest market for most bicycle retailers. A view generally regarded to be accurate when even large general stores such as Tesco and catalogue companies like Argos for example are starting to stock them.
Please see - Bike Europe - News: Bike Industry ready for E-bike boom - this article was dated 12/06/07

I could show many more links but that would just be boring.

The bottom line is, for many of us within the age range stated, we have to do something to stem the rising costs of day to day living. And one of the first things you think about is how to reduce your travelling costs, especially when you live relatively close to where you work (approximately up to 12/13 miles). For many, the logical answer is to get on their bikes but they can't afford to be sweaty on arrival at work, so after doing a little research, they discover the next best thing - the electric bike - usually a powabike, as they seem to be in almost every third bicycle shop you visit. The more discerning however, then try to discover what else is out there.

So, if travel costs keep rising, the electric bike will have a rosy future as it is the cheapest form of motorised vehicle whilst still classed as a bicycle and ride-able by anyone over 14 (in th Uk).

Why am I so sure about my facts? - because I have had to do alot of research into cycling trends, who rides, why they ride, what they ride, who doesn't, why not, what would encourage them to ride more etc etc

 

[Ian]

I think it is a mistake to see e-bikes as being in competition with electric scooters regardless of cost. For some time inexpensive petrol scooters have been cheaper than many e-bikes but generally do not share the same marketplace. The situation in the 1950's was very different, most people could only afford one vehicle and were naturally seeking to get the best for their limited funds. These days they are much more likely to buy a bike, and a scooter as well if that's what they want, these being in addition to the one or more cars they already own. The bike of course has the advantage of being easily transportable in the car for recreational use.

At the cheap end e-bikes will continue to have impulse purchase appeal, far more so than scooters where the purchaser has to deal with red tape, and in many cases has to take a CBT before use, while at the higher end e-bikes will continue to appeal to just the sort of people they do at present, many seeking relief from the ratrace (Such as myself) to whom a scooter, electric or otherwise, has no appeal.

I doubt there will be massive growth in the e-bike market, most people will always prefer cars, but the e-bike will continue to exist, not because it's cheap but because it is what a small, but significant minority will continue to prefer.

 

[flecc]

Yes, in reply to MonVal Electra and Ian, my post was not a firm belief of what will happen but the possibility based on history repeating itself. But of course circumstances have changed, and I wanted to see all the arguments for and against to get all the salient factors.

I think the concensus shows they will exist in ten and more years time, though I've seen nothing convincing that they will be a major form of transport. Our climate doesn't help, and although global warming is forecast to change that to hotter dryer summers, the rate of change is very slow and that will be offset by wetter winters anyway.

I'd love to see a far higher proportion of Britons cycling as the majority did in the 1950s and before, but they'd progressed to cycling from walking, with many forced into it by war. Getting the bulk of the public to reverse that is a very different matter. Certainly some superficial willingness is shown as demonstrated by sales of 2 million bikes a year in the UK, but let's face it, they aren't on our roads, many dumped after the first one or two rides.
.

 

[flecc]

these are currently much more expensive than a conventional petrol scooter which is very cheap to run anyway (there are brand new 50cc road legal petrol scooters currently being advertised at around £650)an equivellent electric scooter would be £1200+ if the batteries lasted less than two years it would work out more expensive to run.

But as I posted, my proposal was for better long life batteries which affect the scooter as well the e-bike, the benefits equal. Lithium Iron Phosphate promises at least four times the life of lithium manganese etc., and could reach eight times the life with development.

Historically price is not material. When scooters like the Vespa and Lambretta wiped cyclemotors from the road the scooters were many times more expensive, but that didn't matter to the public who just wanted the advantages of not pedalling, better performance and perceived better weather protection.

One very important perception in this is the difference between being able to ride along with the traffic at the same speed and riding at the side of the road with vehicles rushing past in close proximity at far higher speeds. In general riders are far more comfortable with the former.
.